Legal Opinion

Hillman v. Colonial Penn Insurance

Court of Appeals of Kansas

Decided March 4, 1994No. 69,901PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Pierron, J.:

This appeal arises from the district court’s decision granting summary judgment to the plaintiff/appellee, Edward Von Hillman. The district court held the defendant/appellant, Colonial Penn Insurance Company (Colonial), was liable under the terms of its policy for injuries the plaintiff sustained in a motor vehicle accident. The defendant appeals, claiming there was no insurance policy in effect at the time of the accident and that if there was, the uninsured motorist provisions do not apply.

The facts are undisputed. L.E. Stinson purchased insurance from Colonial. Stinson renewed…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hutchinson National Bank & Trust Co. v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1988
  2. Hartford Fire Insurance v. Western Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1979
  3. Topeka Tent & Awning Co. v. Glen Falls InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1989

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Unruh v. Prudential Property & Casualty InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1999
  2. Allied Mutual Insurance v. MoederCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2002
  3. Russell v. Farmers Ins. Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of Kansas · 2007
  4. In the Interest of R.C.Court of Appeals of Kansas · 1995
  5. State v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1994

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API